Pages

Tuesday, 26 April 2016

Battleborn is a multiplayer
focused, MOBA style first person shooter. I really didn’t know much
about Battleborn going in. In fact, I haven’t really seen or heard
much about it at all. It seems a little overshadowed by Overwatch,
although based on what I’ve seen and played, Battleborn offers
quite a different experience.

But it’s not hard to see
why comparisons will be made. Both are ‘hero’ based team games,
with a variety of unique characters to play, combined with vibrant,
cartoon style graphics. But though it’s primarily a multiplayer
game, Battleborn does offer a fun, if somewhat limited single player
and co-op campaign mode.

It’s essentially a series
of missions strung together with a very loose narrative thread. It
shares a style and humour similar to Borderlands in terms of
characters and ‘story’. Although a welcome addition, these
missions appear to be little more than linear corridors with multiple
enemies to grind your way through.

The beta only included two
missions, so I can’t say how the rest will pan out, but what was on
offer was extremely basic. You can play these missions solo or in
co-op, and I suspect co-op play is where you’ll find the most
enjoyment in this mode. As you progress through the level you’ll
face a handful of mini-bosses before eventually encountering the
final end of mission boss.

The boss fights are a lot
of fun, each featuring unique enemies with unique attack patterns.
They make a welcome change of pace to the repetitive hordes of
standard enemy grunts. The bosses are, without a doubt, the highlight
of the single player/co-op mode, and they make grinding your way
through the (admittedly very pretty) corridor worth it in the end.

That said, once I’d
completed both of these missions, I had zero desire to replay them.
The game does give you some incentive to do so – higher difficulty
modes and the ability to unlock gear that can carry over into the MP
– but there simply wasn’t enough variety or complexity to draw me
back in.

A big part of the problem
is how the hero characters play. Each character only has two types of
attack combined with three special abilities, all of which you’ll
be rather tired of by the time you’ve grinded your way through the
mission. These limited weapons and abilities make perfect sense
within the context of the competitive MP, but result in a repetitive
SP/co-op experience.

I’d have liked this part
of the game far more if there were periodic ‘character flip’
stations positioned throughout each mission, allowing you to switch
to a new hero, thereby providing some much needed variety.

Which leads us onto the
core part of Battleborn – the MP. Two modes were available in the
beta, although I really only sunk any significant time into one of
them – Incursion. There was another mode called Meltdown, but I
didn’t find it as compelling or enjoyable as Incursion, so that’s
pretty much what I stuck with and will be referring to in this post.

So as I said, Battleborn is
a MOBA style first person shooter. The map is essentially one long
corridor, along which there are four ‘objective’ NPCs – two on
each team – that must either be protected or destroyed. As you
advance through the map you can earn and collect shards that allow
you to utilise equipped gear, build various automated turrets or
spawn ally NPCs.

It’s a 5v5 game that
requires a degree of coordination in order to win. Because although
the hero characters you play as are certainly powerful, the match
really is won or lost by which team better manages their NPC support.
Your ‘minions’ are a key part to victory, particularly when
facing the objective NPCs which take time and serious fire power to
take down.

Playing Battleborn for the
first time in MP is a little bit of a nightmare in terms of knowing
exactly what the hell is going on or what you’re supposed to do.
But the map is neatly designed and full of helpful icons and hints
which push you in the right direction, and after a match or two you
should be fully up to speed.

It’s also important to
try to build a somewhat balanced team, with characters who fall into
specific class groups – ranged, melee, heavy, light and healing.
There’s a wide and varied selection of unique characters to choose,
each with their own attack types and special abilities. I didn’t
have time to play or unlock them all, but I found 2-3 I quite
enjoyed, particularly the mushroom headed healer.

As you progress through a
match your hero will level up, allowing you to unlock boosts to your
existing abilities. You can also spend collected shards on unlocking
gear (you can take 3 pieces into a match) which provide unique
effects such as increased damage, shield strength, or a reduction in
ability cooldown.

Matches are fast paced,
colourful and hectic, lasting no more than 30 minutes, which is the
match limit. And I have to say, I had quite a lot of fun playing it.
For a game I knew little about and had little interest in, I
thoroughly enjoyed my time with it. So will I picking it up on
release? Well...

When both teams clash in a
match, it’s often hard to know exactly what the hell is going on. I
like how bright and colourful the game is, but when multiple AoE
attacks are popping off, the combat becomes a total clusterf**k
that’s nearly impossible to sort through, particularly if you’re
playing as a melee focused hero.

Balance is something I
can’t really comment on. With so many characters with so many
varied abilities, it’s hard to get a sense of any that may prove
more or less effective than others. What I can say is that some of
the characters I played did
feel more effective than others, but that may have been due to me
favouring their style of play more than anything.

My main concern for
Battleborn is really long term appeal. Sure, I had fun with it, but
even with a variety of maps, there’s no getting around the fact
that the game modes are essentially a repetitive grind from A to B.
Also, because each hero only has a small number of attack types and
abilities, playing as the same hero a couple of times in a row can
get a little tedious. Thankfully, the hero selection is extensive and
varied, so there’s always something new to play and mix things up.

Is there depth to the game?
Is there scope to improve as an individual player? That’s hard to
say. Once I’d played as the mushroom headed healer several times I
think I got pretty damn good with them. In fact, I don’t think I
lost a single match when playing as a healer. But had I ‘mastered’
this hero? Probably not, but I didn’t feel like I was that far from
it either.

And maybe that’s by
design. Because Battleborn is a team focused game, so maybe it’s
not so much about individual skill, and more about working together
to achieve your objectives. So although it may not take long to
‘master’ each hero, the real skill is more about supporting your
team and playing to your strengths as part of a larger strategy.

Game performance is solid,
with only a few noticeable frame drops when things get a little
crazy. It’s a nice looking game and it already feels very polished
and complete. And yeah, I had fun with it. But did it do enough to
convince me to pick it up on release? No, not quite, especially when
the game is shipping with a DLC Season Pass and from what I’ve
read, will feature microtransactions.

The DLC may only be
SP/co-op content, and the microtransactions may only be cosmetic in
nature, but whenever microtransaction content features in a full
price release, I can’t help but be wary. There’s also these
things called ‘gear packs’ you can currently buy with in-game
currency, but I do wonder if they may extend the microtransaction
model to include them. Or maybe I’m just being paranoid. I’ve
really got nothing against post-release content, I’m just concerned
how it may pan out over time.

Oh, and there’s also the
concern of if the game will attract a large enough player base to
keep it going. As I said at the beginning of this post, it already
feels overshadowed by other titles, and I do wonder if there’s
enough depth and variety here to hook an audience in for the long
haul. Overall though, I enjoyed my time with Battleborn, but not
quite enough to convince me to pick it up, at least not on release.
It’s a neat blend of genres, with a great selection of playable
characters and some fast, colourful action. I’ll be keeping an eye
on it.

Wednesday, 20 April 2016

Viewtiful Joe is a side
scrolling action game originally released on the Nintendo GameCube in
2003. It’s a game I have very mixed feelings towards. There are
some aspects I adore, but others I’m very frustrated by. You play
as Joe, a regular guy whose girlfriend Silvia is kidnapped by evil
movie monsters, and Joe must enter Movieland to save her.

Graphically, VJ is a great
looking game, with wonderful environments, characters and animations.
It’s a colourful mixture of 2D and 3D with a dash of cel-shading.
In terms of audio, VJ is also pretty good, with some great music and
effects. The story, such as it is, is suitably silly with a lot of
humour and amusing characters.

Playing as Joe, you can
perform basic punch, kick and jump attacks, combining them to form
combos. It’s not quite the combo system you’d expect, however.
Chaining together hits will net you more points, but it’s the dodge
mechanic that’s at the heart of VJ’s combo system.

Dodging just before a hit
will ‘daze’ an enemy, allowing Joe to strike freely and deal more
damage. You also net more points for doing so. It’s a neat
risk/reward system. Sure, you can blast through and attack without
worrying too much about dodging (at least on the easiest difficulty),
but doing so will grant you faster kills, more points and a higher
final ranking. And on the higher difficulties, knowing when and how
to dodge effectively is a requirement if you want to survive.

The combat system isn’t
just about punches and kicks, though. You also have three special
abilities – to slow time, to speed it up, or to ‘zoom in’ –
all of which can be combined with your standard attacks. It creates a
stylish, colourful and varied combat system, one which takes time to
learn and master. Although I liked the system overall, I do have some
minor gripes with it.

The first is that it’s
not the most fluid system in terms of movement, particularly when Joe
is in the air. Repositioning can be tricky, and you’ll often find
yourself unable to move when locked into an animation. Certain
enemies can also lock into an animation that completely ignores your
attack, forcing you to watch as your kicks and punches simply pass
through their model.

That’s because the combat
system in VJ is one of precision. It requires precise movement,
timing and strikes. It’s designed to be this way, so my gripes are
a matter of personal preference more than anything, but as a result,
I did find it to be more frustrating than fun at times, and I do wish
there was more fluidity of movement, and more freedom to break free
of animation cycles.

The game takes place across
seven episodes, taking roughly eight or so hours to complete. But
it’s the kind of game that you can really race through if you know
what you’re doing. It’s one of those rare games I’d be
genuinely interested in watching a speed run of. The episodes offer a
fairly varied mix of environments and challenges, each with their own
boss.

There’s a lot of platform
style puzzles and challenges to complete, in addition to the
fighting. And I really liked how your time powers are incorporated
into these environmental puzzles. The boss fights are all unique and
challenging in their own way, but they’re also not without their
issues.

Many of the bosses tend to
have very specific attack patterns, and learning these really is the
key to beating them as opposed to player skill. Rather than intuitive
design, these fights feel more like a matter of trial and error until
you crack the pattern and figure out the relatively easy way to
defeat the boss.

Enemy variety is another
issue. Once you’re past episode 3 or so, there’s nothing really
new to face in terms of enemy types. There’s a few new twists on
enemies you’ve already fought, but nothing radically different
aside from the boss fights. The game, unfortunately, also has a habit
of recycling certain fights multiple times (tanks and helicopters in
particular), which can grow rather tedious as you progress. Hell, the
second to last episode is simply all the boss fights in the game
repeated one after the other. And there’s no new twists on the
fights, which is pretty disappointing.

And I guess that’s my
real problem with Viewtiful Joe. It begins far more strongly than it
ends. The initial half of the game as you unlock your powers, explore
new mechanics and encounter new enemies and environmental challenges,
is pretty damn fantastic. But the second half of the game fails to
introduce anything particularly new, and the last three or so
episodes are little more than a gauntlet to run of everything you’ve
already faced. Challenging, yes. But not exactly compelling – more
a tedious grind to the finish.

I began VJ having a ton of
fun, unable to tear myself away, but as the game progressed, I found
myself growing increasingly irritated by the quirks of its combat
system and rather tired of having to fight the same damn enemies time
and time again. I went from wanting to play VJ, to almost having to
force myself to sit down and play it. VJ feels like it packs all its
best moments into the first half of the game, and as a result, the
second half is a little disappointing.

There’s a few extra
things I should cover before I wrap this up. Points scored can be
spent on certain upgrades or limited abilities between levels. It’s
a neat addition, but it doesn’t really mix up the combat to any
substantial degree. There are two difficulties unlocked at the start
– Kids and Adult – but I’d recommend starting with Kids if it’s
your first time, as it’ll give you a decent run for your money
before you start getting a handle on the combat.

Keeping your combat flow
going is also key to higher rankings, and kicking and punching
enemies into one another can further boost your score. But be warned
– using special abilities can increase your damage output, but also
increase damage sustained, so they must be used with care.

Overall, VJ is a good game
with a deep, if rather unforgiving combat system. Those little quirks
I’ve complained about are really just a matter of personal
preference on my part – an issue with me, in other words, rather
than with the game. Because though I didn’t care for those aspects,
I can’t really fault the overall design.

That said, I can’t ignore
my other issues with the game, particularly its second half. It’s a
damn shame, because I was loving Viewtiful Joe during its first half,
but I found myself kind of irritated by its second. But hey, if you
want an engaging, challenging and deep action game, you really can’t
go wrong with it. The combat system is the real highlight and the
best part of the game, despite my personal gripes. It’s just a
shame the game surrounding that system falls a little flat towards
its end.

Saturday, 16 April 2016

It’s not always easy to
talk about how a game ‘feels’ to play. It’s a combination of
various things. What I can say is that this beta of the multiplayer
component of the upcoming Doom didn’t ‘feel’ very good at all.
In fact, it didn’t even really feel like a beta, more like an alpha
build still in the early stages of testing.

It doesn’t feel complete.
‘But it’s a beta’, you might say – ‘of course it’s not
complete!’ But I’m not simply talking about content, but that
nebulous ‘feel’ of the game. It feels like it's lacking in so many
areas that it’s hard to believe they released a beta in this state.

I’m not sure if the
developers regard the MP component of the new Doom as all that
important, because it certainly doesn’t feel like it, based on what
I’ve played. It feels tacked on. A ‘tick on the back of the box’.
It was expected – so here it is.

I played an hour of the
beta and I’d already had enough. But to be fair to the game, I
played on for a couple more, just to see if the game would grow on
me, if something would ‘click’ and it would all begin to make
sense.

But it didn’t. The more I
played, the more I realised just how shoddy the whole thing felt.
Upon opening the game I spent a few moments attempting to explore and
tweak the graphical settings … only to find that there weren’t
any. Outside of some basic options, all of the advanced visual
settings were unavailable.

So I can only assume, that
for the purposes of this beta, the game was set to a Low or Medium
preset given how visually dated it appeared. It’s not a looker,
that’s for sure, with some poorly textured environments and flat
lighting. Everything in the game has a ‘chunky’ kind of look to
it, particularly some of the weapons which seem to take up half of
your screen.

But graphics aren’t
everything, and I can hardly fault the performance, with a solid
60FPS at all times. No, it’s the gameplay where this beta fell
horribly flat for me. Movement felt very light, yet oddly slow. In
fact, there’s very little feeling of any weight to the game.
Weapons lack any kind of punch. I just didn’t get any feeling of
kick or weight when moving, shooting or jumping. Or also when being
attacked.

And that’s a pretty
serious issue, as you can suddenly see your health going down, before
turning around and realising that someone has been blasting you in
the back with a shotgun. And yet, there’s no real feedback of that.
No, I don’t mean having jam smeared across my screen, I mean the
hard kick my character should receive from taking a shotgun blast to
the back at close range.

Even the rocket launcher
feels flimsy and weak, with little splash damage or knock back. In
fact, only 2-3 of the weapons in the beta felt at all effective. The
rest, the assault rifles in particular, felt utterly weak and
useless. In short, the weapons and how they handled in the beta was
pretty f**king bad. They felt like alpha build versions. They simply
weren’t satisfying or fun to use.

The beta contained two
maps, with two game modes. The first was a basic TDM, which is pretty
much what you’d expect. The second was a far more interesting
‘capture the area’ mode, with the twist being that the area was
mobile and traversed a set path around the map. This was pretty neat,
as a mode. Shame about the rest of the game. The beta also contained
part of the MP customisation and unlock system. But these systems
also felt very basic.

It felt like another case
of simply adding in something people might expect from a modern MP
mode, but without any effort being put in to make those elements
engaging and enjoyable for the player. The customisation is nice, if
limited, but all the ‘level up’ and unlock nonsense feels like a
waste of time, like it was just added in to tick another box. The map
design was okay, but felt small. And the whole ‘temporarily turn
into a demon’ thing felt cheap and pointless.

I don’t know what the
point of this beta was. It makes the MP component of the new Doom
seem like a cheaply and hastily added afterthought. None of it felt
right. It didn’t feel good to play. It felt weak. It lacked kick,
impact and punch. I can’t even recall the music, if there was any.
Even the announcer sounded bored.

Yeah, I know, it was only a
beta, and isn’t that the point of it? For this kind of feedback?
But the game is scheduled to release in less than a month, so is
there any real chance that any of this will be improved? And if this
is such a stripped back version of the game, why do an open beta at
all?

I don’t have much more to
say. It was just a bit crap, really. If you’re thinking about
getting the new Doom for its MP, you might want to think again.

Sunday, 10 April 2016

Damn, and I thought Far Cry
4 made me angry. That was nothing compared to playing Fahrenheit
(also known as Indigo Prophecy) during which there were times I very
nearly took the disc out of my console and smashed it to pieces. I’m
ashamed to admit that Fahrenheit had me yelling obscenities at my
screen for the first time in a long time.

Fortunately, these violent
outbursts were relatively few in number during the 6 hours or so I
spent with the game. But they occurred, and when they did I don’t
think I’ve ever wanted to punch a game so hard. For the most part
though, I was rather bored and irritated by Fahrenheit. And yet … I
just had to keep going. I had to see it through. Because despite its
many, many issues, there’s a pretty good concept and some
interesting stuff mixed in that managed to hook me right to the
bitter end.

According to Wikipedia,
Fahrenheit is a ‘cinematic interactive drama action-adventure’
which basically means it’s a narrative driven adventure game full
of QTEs. You play primarily as Lucas Kane, who at the opening of the
game has apparently just murdered a man in a bathroom. You can move
Kane throughout the environment, using the thumb sticks to interact
with various items. A lot of these interactions are unnecessary and
mundane, but others are vital to continue your progression.

And I have to say, I rather
liked the opening sections of Fahrenheit. Playing as Lucas, your
initial concern is to cover your tracks and flee the murder scene.
Once this is done, the game jumps you into the shoes of two
detectives sent to investigate the crime. You’ll be examining the
scene and interviewing witnesses in an attempt to track down …
yourself. And the game does alter slightly depending on your actions,
on what avenues of investigation you choose, or what evidence you, as
Kane, may have left behind.

And I liked this concept a
lot – of playing both the criminal and the cop. Of course, it’s
not long before the story begins to take on something of a
supernatural twist. I didn’t mind too much at first, and I was
genuinely intrigued by where the story was going. But it does reach a
point where it loses its way – probably the moment when Lucas goes
full Neo out of The Matrix – and everything stops making sense and
is rushed along to a rather unsatisfying conclusion.

There’s so much in this
game that, like Neo, made me ask WHY? Why did I even get to play as
Lucas’ brother? What was the point of those short scenes? What was
the point of the male detective or his playable segments? These
include an utterly pointless QTE driven basketball game and another,
equally pointless QTE driven ‘dances with his girlfriend’ scene.

It’s not so bad early on
in the game, but the QTEs soon begin to take over, popping up during
nearly every scene. And I just can’t figure out why. Why do I have
to perform a QTE during certain conversations? What’s the point of
it? There are two, quite lengthy cut scenes where a group of
characters speak but the whole thing is played out by a lengthy
series of QTE prompts. Why?
I can understand the QTEs being used as part of the ‘cinematic’
action scenes, but in Fahrenheit, your characters can’t seem to do
anything without them.

But the mundane and
completely unnecessary QTE segments aren’t what made me angry. They
were tedious and boring, but not anger inducing. No, that was an
issue with many of the action sequences. Many of these involved
lengthy QTE inputs, but slipping on a single one, even when it was
set to ‘Easy’ (and I started playing on Normal, but knocked it
down) can result in a failure.

The game gives you a pretty
punishing window in which to hit these prompts. The button inputs
aren’t too bad, and you’re more likely to miss them out of tedium
than anything, but the trigger mashing QTEs are by far the worst and
randomly seem to fail, often forcing you to restart the entire,
tedious f**king sequence from scratch. And this is where I began to
RAGE!

Too many of the QTE action
scenes drag on to the point where it’s easy to fail because they’ve
lost your attention, or because an input didn’t register properly
or because it leaves such a small margin for error that it’s far
too easy to slip up. And all it takes is a single slip to reset your
entire progress, forcing you to play through these tedious sequences
multiple times. To make it even more silly, there’s so many inputs
in a sequence that you have to focus entirely on them, so you’re
not even really watching the ‘cinematic’ scene anyway.

But what does the game
offer outside of these ‘cinematic’ QTE sequences? Are there
puzzles? Investigation? Exploration? Not exactly. The notion is that
by taking certain actions, the way certain scenes of the story plays
out will change. It’s a neat idea, especially within the early
context of the cop versus criminal idea – where do you hide the
evidence? What leads should you follow?

The problem is that you
very quickly realise that many ‘choices’ simply lead to a failure
state, forcing you to reload and trial and error your way to the
‘correct’ solution which will allow you to progress. There is
some slight variation based upon your actions, but it’s pretty
minimal, mostly confined to the odd piece of dialogue. And, as I’ve
already mentioned, there are many lengthy scenes in the game which
serve no purpose in advancing the story.

Fahrenheit is such a
bizarre game to play. In some ways, I liked the mundane scenes, even
when they didn’t progress the story. They were, at least, a nice
insight into the characters and their lives. But it’s sadly all
wasted, as none it means anything by the end. The game hits a point
where the story begins taking several leaps forward and stops making
any sense. It pretty much goes entirely off the rails in the last
third, but at the very least, it’s amusing to see just how stupid
it can get.

What was initially a slow,
well paced progression is completely discarded and the story rapidly
falls apart. The game becomes little more than an endless series of
tedious and needlessly punishing QTE sequences that will either send
you to sleep or make you want to punch it.

It’s so frustrating,
because I actually liked elements of Fahrenheit. I liked the concept
of switching back and forth between characters. I liked the early
interaction and the conversations. And, despite my issues with it, I
did quite enjoy the story, at least during the first half or so. But
everything else? Even traversing the environments is a pain in the
ass thanks to some incredibly wonky controls which see you
continually get stuck on scenery or walls.

Even as I type this, I’m
still so mad at this game. It began so promising, but rapidly
devolved into a complete mess with some of the most awful, painful,
tedious and rage inducing ‘gameplay’ I’ve ever experienced. But
despite that, I still finished the bloody thing. I had to. I wasn’t
going to let it beat me and I genuinely wanted to see how it would
end. Because despite everything, Fahrenheit did just
enough right to keep me going. But I was glad when it was over. So
glad. And I never want to play it again.

Tuesday, 5 April 2016

It seems we can’t go a
week or so without another ‘controversy’ surrounding the upcoming
release of Total War: Warhammer. This time, it’s about the new
siege system. I’ve said before how I feel it’s time for a shake
up of the Total War ‘formula’ in terms of mechanics and that the
Warhammer license is a fantastic opportunity to do just that.

But as much as change and
innovation is desired, it can also be feared. We’ve seen that
repeatedly as more information has emerged regarding various game
systems, most notably Regional Occupation and now Sieges. People
don’t want the series to grow stale, but they’re surprisingly
resistant when the developers attempt to shake up the core formula.

If you’ve read my other
posts on this title, you’ll know that personally, I’m very much
in favour of shaking things up. I feel the series needs it. That’s
why I’m very open to these new systems, these new twists on the
formula. Because I hope they’ll provide a unique and fresh Total
War experience.

Sieges in Total War have
changed dramatically from one title to the next, but they’ve always
suffered from similar issues, most notably – AI. Navigating
complicated siege maps and correctly utilising siege equipment has
always proven troublesome to the siege AI. I think many would agree
that the ‘best’ or at least, the most consistent, siege AI of the
series was in Shogun 2.

But Shogun 2 was subject to
a similar level of criticism upon release regarding its new siege
system. Many saw it as a step back from previous titles such as Rome
or Medieval 2. This is because Shogun 2 heavily simplified its siege
maps and mechanics. Maps were more open, removing many navigation
obstacles that might present a problem to the AI. It also gave
infantry units an inherent ability to scale walls without the need to
build or deploy specific siege equipment.

The result? Siege AI that
was, at the time, the most consistently competent of the series. But
in truth, the Shogun 2 siege AI wasn’t doing anything particularly
complex – the maps and mechanics were simply arranged in such a way
that made it much easier for the AI to perform. When Rome 2 increased
the complexity of its siege maps, the flaws in the AI were plain for
all to see.

I wouldn’t say the siege
AI in Rome 2 or, more particularly, Attila, were bad,
however. In fact, considering the complexity of the settlements and
the addition of barricades, deployable defences and siege escalation,
I’d argue the capability of the siege AI in Attila is the best it’s
ever been – even more so than Shogun 2. But the fact is, the siege
AI has proven to perform and behave at a higher and more consistent
level when the obstacles placed before it are reduced.

Which is why it’s not
surprising that the sieges in Total War: Warhammer seem to be taking
a Shogun 2 style approach in terms of simplicity of design. Instead
of multiple walls or gates, we instead have a map with a single wall
to assault or defend. The city streets are significantly widened, as
are the city walls. And, like Shogun 2, may units possess the ability
to climb the walls (with ladders) without the need to build or deploy
the equipment.

The intention is to create
a new siege dynamic where the battle for the walls is all the more
important. In previous titles, including Rome 2 and Attila, it was
often sensible to abandon the walls and instead defend choke points
within the city. Walls were always a terrible place to fight, most
notably due to the lack of manoeuvrability for the units stationed
upon them. It was also incredibly easy to punch a hole through these
walls, making them rather redundant in terms of city defence.

As much as I enjoyed the
sieges in Attila, I wouldn’t argue they gave any great degree of
tactical choice. Despite the complexity of the settlements, walls and
terrain, they played in a very similar manner to those in the
original Shogun or Rome – create an opening and grind your way
inside. It seems the intention of the new siege system in Total War:
Warhammer is to instead make the walls the focus of the siege and the
action.

With city tower range now
extending into the enemy deployment zone, sieges should now be far
faster paced with the attacker unable to simply sit back and whittle
down the walls and defences. Now, they must take the initiative and
immediately advance. But city towers must now also be manned to
function, making it advantageous for the defender to hold the walls
for as long as possible.

It appears units using the
‘magic’ ladders (as they’ve been referred to) will receive a
hefty penalty in terms of either morale, attack or defence, meaning
siege towers and battering rams (or monsters) will be the preferred
way to go. And the reduction of the settlements to a single wall and
gate (or two, in some cases) now means that the action is focused
entirely on a single location.

This can be seen as a
reduction of tactical choice, but let’s be honest – in previous
games, even custom battles of the largest city maps – siege battles
tend to be fought at only one or two locations anyway, and a good
60-70% of the city goes unused. Because the larger the map, the
smaller the action.

The siege maps in Total
War: Warhammer appear to quite snugly accommodate a 40 stack army –
meaning that in the largest possible siege, every part of the map
shall be used. I’ve seen people use videos of ‘epic’ custom or
MP siege battles as an example of the tactical variety possible in
the complex city maps of Rome 2 or Attila, but these custom set up
engagements are in no way representative of the typical siege battles
a player will fight during a campaign.

No, siege battles in a
campaign will typically only involve a single stack or less. By
reducing the map size and simplifying the design, it means these
sieges will still feel like important engagements. Especially
compared to Rome 2 or Attila, where you’d have very large and
complex cities such as Constantinople, but campaign sieges of the
city would seem rather small, because the maps dwarfed the typical
number of units present in such a battle.

They also didn’t feel
very much like ‘real’ cities, as many were just walls surrounding
a small number of buildings. In Total War: Warhammer, the playable
siege area only represents a single section of the city, and the rest
of it serves as an impressive backdrop, creating the illusion of a
vast cityscape, but without losing the focus.

And all this sounds good to
me. It’s another shake up of the system. It’s taking lessons
learned from previous games and applying them with a new twist. That
said, there are some concerns I have. The first is the number of city
templates. Not every settlement will have a unique layout, which I
think is perfectly understandable. But the more map templates – the
better. Hopefully they’ll have an extensive selection.

I also hope we’ll see
variation between settlement layouts in terms of race. This isn’t a
major issue, as the races will each possess unique architecture,
somewhat disguising the map design. From what I’ve seen, the human
and vampire architecture looks stunning. But the dwarf siege maps do
concern me as the ones I’ve seen were very visually flat and poorly
detailed compared to the human and vampire maps.

Obviously, new siege maps
could be patched into the game over time – as we saw with Shogun 2.
I also like the notion that non-capital settlements won’t have
sieges but field battles unless the settlement is specifically
upgraded – hopefully this will cut down on the siege-fest that
plagued the more recent titles.

As I’ve said before,
there’s still a lot we don’t know and we’re really just
speculating about how a lot of this will play out in practice. But
like with Regional Occupation, I do see this new siege system as a
potential benefit to the overall experience. A fresh experience. A
chance for Total War to shake up the formula and try something new. I
understand people may be wary of that, but all we can do now is wait
and see.

Friday, 1 April 2016

Bayonetta is a game that
just keeps on giving. Just when you think the game has run out of
ways to surprise you, it takes a sudden turn and pulls another rabbit
out of its hat. I kept wondering if the game would eventually fall
flat. It couldn’t keep this up, could it? But, with confidence and
style, Bayonetta surpassed all my expectations, providing a thrilling
ride from start to finish.

Bayonetta is a third person
action game developed by Platinum Games. I never played it upon
release. It was only recently after completing Vanquish again that I
thought I should really give it a spin. And within only the first 20
minutes or so, I was already in love. Bayonetta is sheer joy to play.

Bayonetta, as a character,
is perfect. She takes such pleasure in what she does that her
enjoyment of every moment is infectious. It’s rare that you’ll
find a video game hero quite so in love with what they do. Her visual
design and animation is outstanding and her VA is spot on. She’s a
fantastic character, not just to play, but simply to watch. And,
perhaps surprisingly, she’s a character with real emotional depth.

I was expecting the story
of Bayonetta to be somewhat forgettable nonsense, and although it’s
as bonkers as I expected, it’s also rather engaging, as Bayonetta
embarks on a journey to uncover her past. Whereas other Platinum
titles such as Vanquish or Metal Gear Rising were arguably more style
over substance, particularly in terms of story, Bayonetta not only
provides a deep and fantastically stylish gameplay experience, but a
deep narrative and character experience too.

I played through Bayonetta
on the Normal difficulty, which is the highest available to start,
but once completed it unlocks an additional Hard mode. It took about
10 hours, which is a fairly substantial campaign and all the more
impressive considering how tightly designed everything is. Completing
the game unlocks a New Game + of sorts where you can replay any
chapter on the various difficulties whilst retaining your items,
weapons and abilities.

It’s amazing how much I
missed the first time through. There’s a lot of hidden extras to
find, and the battle ranking system lends itself to a great deal of
replay value. You’ll be ranked on time, damage taken, combo score
and items used. There’s a nice variety of weapons in the game, all
of which handle differently and provide a unique set of attacks. The
combo system is refreshingly simple and responsive, but has real
depth. Once you get the hang of chaining together attacks, you’ll
be juggling enemies in the air like a pro.

The way the various weapons
are incorporated into your fighting style is fast and fluid – but
you always feel in control. It’s a game that takes time to learn
and master, and with the ability to combine various weapons and
different techniques, there’s a lot of scope to experiment with
different combat styles. There’s a slow-motion ability which
triggers upon a dodge. There’s also charged special moves to deal
massive damage to an opponent in a particularly brutal ‘torture’
animation. Some enemies drop weapons you can pick up and use,
providing another twist to combat.

In short, the combat of
Bayonetta is fantastic. There were many fights I just didn’t want
to end, because I was having such fun tearing my way through enemies
and chaining together combos. It’s something I never grew tired of,
especially with the ability to instantly switch out my weapons to a
new set and an entirely new way of fighting.

But that wouldn’t mean
very much, however, if the game didn’t provide a good selection of
enemies to pummel into submission. But Bayonetta has this covered,
with a variety of enemy types both large and small. Their design is
fantastic, especially the bosses. Bayonetta has several boss fights,
all of which require a different approach. These are a little more
mixed in terms of quality, but all of them provide a unique
challenge.

Outside of the combat, you
also have some simple environmental puzzles and platform challenges
to mix things up. And I loved the way the environments would
sometimes shift during combat, meaning you’d have to be on your
toes – not only aware of the enemies you’re fighting, but also of
the changing environment around you.

There’s a great variety
of environments, and the game is always throwing something new at you
– a new location, new skills, new weapons, new enemies and entirely
new gameplay mechanics. Just when I thought I’d seen everything, I
could suddenly transform into a panther. Or run up walls. Or ride a
motorcycle. Or control a missile tearing through the sky in an After
Burner style sequence. Bayonetta is a game full of wonderful
surprises. It never stops.

Are there flaws? Sometimes
the framerate can suffer when there’s a lot going on, which means
you might take a cheap hit. Some of the cinematic QTE moments are a
little unforgiving and result in an instant death if you miss one,
which doesn’t feel very fair. And…yeah, it’s hard to really
think of anything to be critical of.

Bayonetta is a fantastic
game, and I really can’t believe I didn’t pick it up sooner. It
has a sense of fun and adventure about it that you don’t see very
often. It’s a game that expertly balances humour against a more
serious tone. It has the style and
the substance, both in terms of narrative and gameplay. It’s video
game joy at its purest. It doesn’t get much better than this.